KUALA LUMPUR (July 21, 2011):Political aide Teoh Beng Hock was driven to suicide due to the aggressive interrogation methods used by Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) officers, the Royal Commission of Inquiry (RCI) concluded.

The inquiry into Teoh's death two years ago at the Selangor MACC headquarters found that he was under great stress after continuous questioning sessions.

Minister in the Prime Minister's Department Datuk Seri Nazri Aziz, who released the RCI report today, said the inquiry's finding was supported by the testimony of forensic psychiatrist Professor Paul Edward Mullen, who testified that Teoh killed himself based on his "weak character" as a result of the intense interrogation.

Together with experts Dr Badi'ah Yahya and Dr Nor Hayati Ali, they concluded that the aggressive and relentless interrogation resulted in Teoh experiencing a change in his state of mind, transforming him from being in the low-risk group for suicide into the high-risk group.

"The RCI found that the MACC officers had no reason or intention to kill Teoh," he told a press conference at Parliament building. "Therefore, Teoh was not killed by anyone else."

Nazri said the RCI was of the view the MACC only wanted Teoh to confess so he could be a witness. However, it found that three investigating officers involved in the case had continuously questioned Teoh, using aggressive, inappropriate methods and had, therefore, violated procedures.

The RCI named the three MACC officers as:

>> former Selangor MACC deputy director Hishamuddin Hashim;

>> investigating officer Mohd Anuar Ismail; and

>> officer Mohd Ashraf Yunus.

Nazri gave the assurance that swift action will be taken against the officers to preserve and reassure the people of the anti-graft commission's credibility. The RCI had also proposed improvement for MACC to study and take remedial measures in various aspects.

In an immediate response, Teoh's family said they could not accept the suicide verdict and called for a judicial review of the RCI's findings.

Teoh, 30, was found dead on the 5th floor corridor of the Selangor MACC office in Plaza Masalam, Shah Alam, on July 16, 2009, the day after being called in to assist in investigations against his boss, Seri Kembangan assemblyman Ean Yong Hian Wah, over alleged irregularities into disbursement of Selangor government funds.

Asked if the family can seek any remedies if they are dissatisfied with the findings, Nazri said: "We are open. It is up to them. If they are not satisfied, then they can take other actions allowed by the law.

"On behalf of the government, I would like to express regret to the family on Teoh's death. The government is also saddened by the incident and the loss of Teoh."

"With this completion of this report, I hope all parties, including the family will find closure," said Nazri.

Asked if the government will apologise to Teoh's family, Nazri stressed that the cabinet only made a policy decision to make the report public.

When further pressed if he believes the government should apologise, Nazri said: "I cannot commit anything on behalf of the cabinet. We are here to talk about the report and what is strongly recommended by the royal commission, surely there is a government commitment to carry out the recommendations."

The 124-page report will be on sale from 10am tomorrow at the Legal Affairs Division of the Prime Minister's Office in Putrajaya retailing at RM45 a copy and is available in both English and Bahasa Malaysia.

Chronology of events

2009

July 16: Teoh's body is found on the 5th floor corridor at Plaza Masalam, Shah Alam at 1.30pm.

July 22: The cabinet decides to set up an inquest to determine the cause of Teoh's death.

On the same day, the cabinet also decides to set up a royal commission of inquiry to scrutinise the mode of questioning employed by the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) to determine whether there is violation of human rights during Teoh's questioning.

July 24: Selangor police chief Datuk Khalid Abu Bakar (now deputy inspector-general of police) said the inquest will be held for 15 days, beginning July 29.

July 29: The inquest before Coroner Azmil Muntapha Abas decides to call 77 witnesses, including 28 MACC officers, chemists, pathologists and Teoh's close friends. On the same day, the inquest was adjourned to Aug 5, to enable lawyer Gobind Singh Deo, representing Teoh's family, lawyer Malik Imtiaz Sarwar (representing the Selangor government) and the Bar Council to study the new documents.

Aug 19: The Coroner's Court directs the police to conduct investigations into the contents of a mysterious letter which has details relating to Teoh's death.

Oct 27: Teoh's family files an application to the magistrate's court, seeking an order for his remains to be exhumed so that a second post-mortem can be conducted.

2010

Nov 4: The inquest proceedings conclude.

2011:

Jan 5: The Coroner's Court rules that Teoh's death was not due to suicide, homicide or third party involvement.

Jan 26: The Royal Commission of inquiry (RCI) is set up.

Feb 14: RCI convenes.

May 10: RCI proceedings conclude after 70 witnesses testify, including Teoh's former boss and Seri Kembangan assemblyman Ean Yong Hian Wah, and several MACC officers, who were not called during the inquest at the Shah Alam Coroner's Court.

June 22: The commission hands over its report to Yang di-Pertuan Agong Tuanku Mizan Zainal Abidin.

The July 9 Bersih 2.0 rally for free and fair elections is a landmark event in more ways than one. Not only has it galvanized many Malaysians into action against a system that has long been described as decaying, eaten to the bone by corruption and abuse of power, it has also made many in the influential First World wonder about the political leadership and future of the country.

One such person is John Malott, a former US ambassador to Malaysia, who is still widely regarded for his knowledge of the country and its political dynamics. In the wake of the Bersih rally, he was asked for his assessment by a think-tank East-West Center established by the US Congress, and he offered his opinion in an analysis entitled Malaysia’s Political Awakening: A Call to US Leadership.

The analysis was published in the Center's Asia Pacific Bulletin, which is delivered directly to over 1,500 leaders of the US foreign policy community, including Members of Congress and their staffs; officials in the White House, US State Department, and US Defense Department; and will influence leaders in US think tanks, university research centers, and the media.

In his article, Malott minced no words, opining that the idyllic image many top US leaders still held of Malaysia as a “democratic, booming, tropical paradise” was no longer true, and in fact, a reverse situation had been taking place. He shared the opinion of another expert Clive Kessler that this situation has now reached a “most fluid and dangerous” point. Kessler is the Emeritus Professor, Sociology & Anthropology, School of Social Sciences & International Studies, The University of New South Wales.

“The purpose of writing this article was two-fold. One, to get the American foreign policy community to "wake up" to what has been happening in Malaysia and shake off any idealized notion of Malaysia as a democratic, booming, tropical paradise. Two, in the words of Amnesty International, to say that America cannot be a "spectator" as the political situation in Malaysia evolves,” Malott told Malaysia Chronicle in a recent interview.

“The United States has many interests in Malaysia, including supporting those members of civil society who are calling for electoral reform and greater democracy. We need to go beyond mere lip service and make sure that we stand on the right side of Malaysia's future.”

A more vocal US

Given the impact Bersih has made on the international community and as more analyses such as Malott’s are distributed to specific and specialised audiences in the US, there is likely to be some adjustment in Washington’s perception of Malaysia going forward. It is possible the US may be more vocal about their support for democratic development in Malaysia, a signal that should not be missed by the alert in the government and business sectors.

In the interview with Malaysia Chronicle, Malott explained what he meant by “US leadership” and stressed that US concerns did not lie in who formed the government of Malaysia but about the continuation of and support for democracy in the Southeast Asian nation.

“I called for US leadership. By that I mean, we need to be more visible and vocal in expressing our concerns about developments in Malaysia. We need to be more supportive – moral support and encouragement – of those members of civil society in Malaysia who want Malaysia to become a true democracy and have the same freedom that we and others have. We should support the call for electoral reform. It is not up to America who forms the government in Malaysia. But we should be concerned whether the playing field is level,” said Malott.

But serious though the current situation is, Malott does not think that Malaysians had reached “boiling point”. He also believes it is possible for the BN government to regain control of the situation.

“I don't believe that the situation is near the boiling point. Malaysians don't boil. They are a very patient people. That is why July 9 was such a remarkable event. The temperature went up, but it is nowhere near the boiling point. But if people don't follow through – if the leaders of civil society, the opposition and others don't follow through, the temperature will go down. If the government carves out more space for those who don't agree with them, they also could lower the temperature,” said Malott.

Two different eras – Mahathir and Najib

He warned the imbalances were real and discontent would continue to fester if reforms were ignored. And while concerned, foreign investors and businesses had not reached the stage where they would shun Malaysia. In the past, especially during the time of former prime minister Mahathir Mohamad, Malaysians and investors put up with his ham-fisted rule because the economy was booming. But not anymore.

“As long as the economy was booming, a lot of the underlying racial and social tensions could be contained. Plus people were willing to grant Mahathir the right to wield his political iron hand in exchange for the economic benefits that the country was getting. Despite the occasional scandals and the cronyism, the Malaysian "man in the street" thought that he had benefited greatly from Malaysia's growth, and he was right. But now for over a decade the economy has slowed, and investment is down. Many college grads are unemployed. And the Government has removed subsidies on everyday items. So I think the man in the street – the Malaysian middle class, the people who live in the cities — don't have the same feeling they had before. They don't see the same level of economic progress for themselves. They don't see the government delivering on all the promises it has made.”

Malott was also scathing about the way Prime Minister Najib Razak handled the July 9 Bersih march, where more than 1,600 people were arrested, thousands more injured and one died from the excessive police crackdown ordered by the authorities.

“The actions of the government, before and after July 9, backfired against them. Matthias Chang wrote that they acted with sheer stupidity. The Government still has a chance to turn this around, but that would require them to give more political "space" to those who don't agree with them, and to make sure that the people get to enjoy the rights that the constitution guarantees them. Will they? I have my doubts. This is a government – even though they have spent millions on PR firms and management consultants – that keeps shooting itself in the foot. The deportation of the French lawyer is only the latest example. Now, for the first time, all the juicy details of that scandal – including the model who was murdered by the PM's bodyguards – have appeared in the Washington Post. It just adds to the confusion among people here – what kind of a country is Malaysia, anyhow? And is Najib really the person that he has portrayed himself to be?”

Malaysia Chronicle appends blow the unedited full-text of the interview with John Malott, ambassador from 1995 to 1998 and is currently the president of the Japan-America Society of Washington DC

Chronicle: In your article, you mentioned that the Malaysian people showed they would no longer be intimidated by their government. Given the severity of the pre-rally crackdown and the police scare-mongering and yet tens of thousands defied the ban, would you say this feeling of ‘defiance’ so to speak is deep-seated, has been growing and is reaching boiling point? And why?

Malott: I think that this discontent has been growing for sometime. But the heavy hand of the government in the days leading up to the July 9 rally, and their strange statements and actions – like saying that Bersih was trying to overthrow the government and banning the color yellow – caused many more Malaysians to wake up and pay attention.

Chronicle: If you agree that the feelings of ‘discontent’ or ‘unhappiness’ so to speak are deep-seated, does this imply that the political or living conditions in Malaysia have been and are repressive and do not encourage the truth to be openly raised or discussed. And why?

Malott: I don't know how deep-seated or widespread these feelings are in Malaysia. That's why I wrote in my analysis that the question for the future is whether the momentum can be sustained. Will an increasing number of Malaysians wake up and understand the status of democracy and political freedom in their country, or will it go back to business as usual, where it is just activists in civil society and the opposition who are vocal. As I said, the actions of the government, before and after July 9, backfired against them. Matthias Chang wrote that they acted with sheer stupidity. The Government still has a chance to turn this around, but that would require them to give more political "space" to those who don't agree with them, and to make sure that the people get to enjoy the rights that the constitution guarantees them. Will they? I have my doubts. This is a government – even though they have spent millions on PR firms and management consultants – that keeps shooting itself in the foot. The deportation of the French lawyer is only the latest example. Now, for the first time, all the juicy details of that scandal – including the model who was murdered by the PM's bodyguards – have appeared in the Washington Post. It just adds to the confusion among people here – what kind of a country is Malaysia, anyhow? And is Najib really the person that he has portrayed himself to be?

Chronicle: If you agree that the ‘defiance’ so to speak is not an overnight or sudden swell-up but has been building up through the years, does this imply the policies – both social and economic – adopted by the BN federal government have not been appropriate, in the sense that they did not treat the wants and needs of the people? And why?

Malott: When I was Ambassador, we always believed that as long as the economy was booming, a lot of the underlying racial and social tensions could be contained. Plus people were willing to grant Mahathir the right to wield his political iron hand in exchange for the economic benefits that the country was getting. Despite the occasional scandals and the cronyism, the Malaysian "man in the street" thought that he had benefited greatly from Malaysia's growth, and he was right. But now for over a decade the economy has slowed, and investment is down. Many college grads are unemployed. And the Government has removed subsidies on everyday items. So I think the man in the street – the Malaysian middle class, the people who live in the cities — don't have the same feeling they had before. They don't see the same level of economic progress for themselves. They don't see the government delivering on all the promises it has made. Meanwhile, they read about diamond rings and fancy yachts and $27 million condos in New York. It seems like it is business as usual at the top. One of the articles in your website today (Sunday) said something like 'Malaysia is now being run not for the benefit of the people or even the Malays. It is being run for the benefit of the UMNO elite.'

Chronicle: Do you think these feelings of resentment so to speak are anywhere near boling point, close to boiling point or have already boiled over and what are the implications for the ruling BN coalition, the opposition, long-term investors and the people? And why? For example, is this a wake-up call for the BN, opportunity knocking at the door for the Pakatan, a stay-away call for investors? As for the people, do you foresee the start of a new trend for peaceful assemblies, protests ala Thailand? Or in your words – a political awakening – but in what shape and form will this likely take?

Malott: I don't believe that the situation is near the boiling point. Malaysians don't boil. They are a very patient people. That is why July 9 was such a remarkable event. The temperature went up, but it is nowhere near the boiling point. But if people don't follow through – if the leaders of civil society, the opposition and others don't follow through, the temperature will go down. If the government carves out more space for those who don't agree with them, they also could lower the temperature.

On foreign investment, I think that foreign businessmen are smart. They will not be scared away from Malaysia because of one demonstration. What concerns them most is corruption, the lack of transparency in awarding government contracts, the ease and cost of doing business in Malaysia compared to other locations, whether Malaysia's market is growing fast, its competitiveness, the independence of its courts, the availability of skilled employees, and so on. It is those kinds of practical questions that mean the most to them. As the statistics show, over the last decade or so, Malaysia's share of all the foreign investment coming into ASEAN has been declining. From the point of view of a foreign investor, they have many choices. There are many countries they can invest in. So the question for the Malaysian government is, what do we need to do to increase our attractiveness to foreign investors, compared to our neighbors?

Chronicle: You quoted another expert who used the term “most fluid and dangerous” to describe the situation in Malaysia today. How extreme can the situation become, for example is it possible for Malaysia to regress to a non-democratic state where elections may even be discarded, military or police rule the new order, a ‘closing of doors’ so to speak? And why? In such a case, who would be the prime-movers – PM Najib Razak and his cousin Hishammuddin Hussein, other factions led by DPM Muhyiddin Yassin or ex-PMs Mahathir Mohamad and Abdullah Badawi or UMNO, the party as a whole? I do not mention the other parties in BN because it is clear they do not have the clout, do you agree? What would happen to the opposition in the country then? And for how long could an extreme situation last? You also mentioned in your article, the Economist Intelligence Unit says Malaysia is a "flawed democracy". If this is so, then if in the swing towards a ‘full democracy’, Malaysia collapses into a police regime – to many who have been following the situation closely, this would not be surprising or be an unlikly possibility at all. But for those who still see the country as per its postcards of sunny skies and ideal racial harmony, this would come as a rude shock. Do you agree and what sort of odds would you give to the worst scenario happening? And why? What other scenarios do you seen? And why?

Malott: Clive Kessler, who knows infinitely more about Malaysia than I do, wrote an analysis recently (which you had on your website) in which he raised the prospect that rather than lose an election, UMNO would declare an emergency and not hold elections. As a former State Department official, I don't want to comment on Wikileaks. But when I read the latest leaked cable, in which our Embassy said three years ago, in effect, that UMNO would do "whatever it takes" to remain in power, including subverting the institutions of state power to its own purposes, including the police and the courts. Malaysia has seen Operasi Lalang, it has seen the Sedition Act and ISA used liberally, and more recently it has seen denial of service attacks on the alternative media to keep people from reading what the Government doesn't want them to know. I hope it doesn't come to that. I am not Clive Kessler, and I don't want to make a prediction. But I would not rule out the possibility that something like that might happen. What is the probability of it happening? I don't know. But if it does happen, then as you said, it will come as a great shock to everyone who has been holding a very different image of Malaysia. That is why I wrote my piece. I think the American people need to wake up and understand what is happening in Malaysia today, and to express our concern.

Chronicle: From your article, it looks like the United States is still in the postcards-and-sunny-skies group? Is this view still very entrenched or have there been significant shifts of late? Given the very sizeable investments the US has in Malaysia, should not American foreign policy makers make better efforts to assess the situation? Should they not take some action or send stronger signals to help keep democracy alive in Malaysia? In other words, has not the time come to take sides? What are the things that US bodies could do?

Mallot: I think to the extent American think or know about Malaysia, most of them are still in the picture postcard stage of awareness. So that is why I sent my wake-up call. Let's see what happens. Some of us – all friends of Malaysia — will continue to do everything we can to keep up awareness. Amnesty International said America "should not be a spectator," and I agree. I called for US leadership. By that I mean, we need to be more visible and vocal in expressing our concerns about developments in Malaysia. We need to be more supportive – moral support and encouragement – of those members of civil society in Malaysia who want Malaysia to become a true democracy and have the same freedom that we and others have. We should support the call for electoral reform. It is not up to America who forms the government in Malaysia. But we should be concerned whether the playing field is level, and whether all the parties have an equal chance to access the media, and so on. RTM and Bernama belong to all the people of Malaysia, not to UMNO. They are paid for by all the people of Malaysia, not just those who voted for UMNO. Bersih's demands all seemed quite reasonable to me. When Najib arrived home from Rome the other day, he held an airport press conference and said that Malaysia's elections already are free and fair, and that UMNO has never cheated in an election. Does he really believe that? That is not what all the independent academic studies have to say. And then he went out to meet the people, and according to an article in Malaysiakini, he proceeded to pass out white envelopes with 200 ringgit inside to the people who were there.

Chronicle: Cleaning the Malaysian electoral system and making sure it reflects accurately the wishes the majority seems to be the best way or one the best ways to ensure human rights, cvil liberties and democratic practises prevail. Do you agree and how can the US help to promote such a practise in Malaysia given that the existing BN federal government is insistent that nothing is wrong and is likely to resist efforts to revamp?

Malott: I read that the European Union office in KL is going to recommend that the EU send observer missions to the next election. That is good. That is leadership. I think that some of our organizations – the National Democratic Institute, the International Republic Institute, the Carter Center – should prepare to do the same. The Vice Chair of the Elections Commission said that foreigners would never understand Malaysia's election laws. That was an offensive statement. And it also was strange, since his boss the EC chairman was at that very moment in Bangkok, monitoring the Thai elections.

We should be very visible in our support of Bersih and its goals. I hope that our Embassy and the academic and think tank communities in the US will help our policy makers and opinion leaders understand what the true status of democracy and elections in Malaysia is. For example, an American think tank could invite Ambiga to the US so she can explain directly to us what Bersih is all about. It would be useful to benchmark Malaysia's electoral laws and rules against those elsewhere in the world. For example, how many countries allow their citizens living overseas to vote? What is the minimum age for voters in most countries? How do other countries handle postal ballots – who is allowed to use them? In other countries with publicly-owned television and radio networks – Japan, Britain, America, Australia, Taiwan, Singapore, etc. – how do they ensure that political and election reporting is balanced? How do they provide access to opposition candidates? How do other countries ensure that their election commission is independent? Malaysia needs to make sure that what it does matches the prevailing international standards in other democracies.

I am sure that the Government will resist this. But we should not give in. They can resist, and we should insist.

Chronicle: Do you see any similarity between what is happening in Malaysia and the so-called Arab Spring?

Malott: Well, Malaysia is certainly not Libya or Syria or Yemen. Najib is not a Qaddafi. But still, I was surprised to see that Najib is still saying that the Bersih movement is a veiled attempt to topple his administration through street demonstrations, like those that are now claiming Middle Eastern despots. He said, "It's not so much about electoral reform. They want to show us as though we're like the Arab Spring governments in the Middle East.”

Well, if that is Bersih’s goal, then why did Najib act like an Arab Spring government? It’s only a question of degree. The Malaysian police did not use lethal force, but the mentality is the same. Suppress whoever disagrees with you. Maybe you don’t use tanks, but you use water cannon. It’s not bullets, it’s tear gas. But the authoritarian mindset is exactly the same as the leaders of the Arab Spring governments. Just because you use non-lethal force doesn’t mean it’s OK. – ENDS

On July 9, 20,000 Malaysians gathered in Kuala Lumpur to demand more transparency in electoral laws in connection with next year’s national elections.

Police unleashed tear gas and chemical-laced water on the demonstrators and temporarily detained nearly 1,700 of them. According to reports, authorities also detained six opposition activists without trial and accused them of trying to use the rally to spread communism. Police said they found T-shirts and other materials linked to communist figures.

Apparently, these measures didn’t suffice for some of Malaysia’s nervous ruling elite. The editors of Utusan Malaysia, owned by Prime Minister Najib Razak’s United Malays National Organization ruling party (UMNO), defaulted to a time-tested maneuver: When in doubt, blame the Jews!

The Jews? Most citizens of the overwhelmingly Asian economic giant have never and will likely never meet a Jew in their lifetime. And yet the folks at Utusan Malaysia, which is influential among Muslims in rural areas who rely on government-linked media to shape their worldview, are apparently confident warnings about a “Jewish plot” would resonate in a land without Jews.

To understand why, you need only look at the track record of the man who dominated his nation for a quarter of a century, Malaysia’s fourth prime minister, Mahathir Mohamad.

Mahathir was credited with engineering Malaysia’s rapid modernization and spectacular economic growth. He was a dominant political figure, winning five consecutive general elections. He also used his political clout and controversial laws to detain activists and political opponents.

And Mahathir is an anti-Semite.

Back in 1970, in his treatise on Malay identity, “The Malay Dilemma,” he wrote: “The Jews are not only hooked-nosed … but understand money instinctively. … Jewish stinginess and financial wizardry gained them the economic control of Europe and provoked antisemitism which waxed and waned throughout Europe through the ages.”

In August 1984, a visit by the New York Philharmonic Orchestra was canceled when his Information Minister demanded that music by composer Ernst Bloch be deleted from the program. His crime? He was a Jew and the selection chosen was based on Hebrew melodies.

In 1986, Mahathir charged “Zionists” and Jews with attempting to destabilize the country through allegedly Jewish-controlled media. He subsequently banned The Asia Wall Street Journal for three months describing the publication as “Jewish owned.” In the 1990s, Mahathir used the Malaysian news agency, Bernama, to accuse Australian Jewry of conspiring to topple him.

Mahathir, who made Islam a central component of Malaysian identity, made this chilling charge in 1997: “We are Moslems, and the Jews are not happy to see Moslems progress.”

Perhaps that would help explain the resounding ovation which greeted his screed at a Islamic Leadership Conference in 2003: “The Europeans killed 6 million Jews out of 12 million … but today, the Jews rule the world by proxy. They get others to fight and die for them.”

And just last year the elder statesman of anti-Semites said this at a conference: “Jews had always been a problem in European countries. They had been confined in ghettos and periodically massacred. But they still remained and still thrived and held whole governments to ransom. … Even after their massacre by the Nazis in Germany, they survived to be a source of even greater problems to the world.”

All this may help explain why Hitler’s “Mein Kampf” and the infamous “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” are on prominent display at the Malaysian capital’s International Airport.

But there are some signs that in 2011 not everyone is drinking Mahathir’s toxic Kool-Aid. Maria Chin Abdullah, one of the organizers of the mass rally that sought to prevent electoral fraud, charged that Utusan Malaysia’s warning of an alleged Jewish conspiracy was “nonsense that is being spread in very bad taste,” adding, “To rely on this claim of Jewish support is to insult the people’s good intentions of seeking important reforms.”

Perhaps Kuala Lumpur hasn’t paid much attention to the Arab Spring. Maybe its time they did, especially since it was inspired by Muslims demanding more freedom and democracy. It isn’t world Jewry that is driving members of minorities to the streets of Kuala Lumpur, but the failure of a democratic government to provide equal rights and opportunities to all their citizens. It’s time for Malaysian leaders to grow up. Relying on big-lie Jewish conspiracies is no substitute for honest and transparent governance.

OTTAWA — Biometric technology could be used to identify voters at the ballot box without requiring Muslim women to remove facial veils, but setting up a nation-wide system would be expensive and risks disenfranchising many electors.

The problem with biometric authentication is the time-consuming and expensive process of "enrolling" potential voters in the system. Participants first have to be "scanned" to create baseline data to which their fingerprints or irises will be compared at the polling station.

"Something that people often underestimate is the cost of doing that enrolment," said Steven Kent, a Massachusetts-based expert on identity authentication.

"Whenever we talk about making changes, we have to realize there is a tremendous start-up cost."

Once captured, a voter's biometric data could then be stored on a so-called smart card or in a central database. Voters would present the smart card at a polling station and a machine would scan their irises or fingerprints to electronically match against the information stored on the card. Alternately, the voter's biometric data could be compared against the reference data in a database, BUT THAT WOULD REQUIRE A STABLE ELECTRONIC CONNECTION BETWEEN THE POLLING STATION AND THE DATABASE. Privacy concerns are certain to arise.

The cost of rolling out the hardware and software to make a voter authentication system work would be substantial. Depending on how elections officials chose to implement the system, each of the 308 federal ridings could have a designated polling station equipped with biometric scanners, or every one of the polling stations within a riding — a substantially greater investment in machinery.

THESE POLLS WOULD LIKE BE REQUIRED TO HAVE BACK-UP SCANNERS AS WELL POWER SYSTEMS LIKE GENERATORS OR BATTERIES, ALL AT ADDED EXPENSE, AS WELL AS SECURE ELECTRONIC CONNECTIONS TO A CENTRAL DATABASE.

KUALA LUMPUR: About 10% of the 24 million MyKad identification cards issued since 2001 had been replaced after they were found to be faulty.

Home Minister Datuk Seri Syed Hamid Albar said most of the cases were recorded this year, with 888,495 replacement MyKad identification cards issued until October.

He said the main complaints were defective chips or damaged plastic cards.

Last year, the figure stood at 769,674, while it was 204, 572 in 2006. The number of MyKad replacements in 2001 was 32,670, followed by 24,131 (2002), 16,678 (2003), 22,484 (2004), and 45,487 (2005).

Syed Hamid said he was not happy with the number of faulty cards recorded, and said the low number of damaged or defective MyKad identification cards in the first year compared to this year was because the chip-based card was only rolled out on a pilot project basis in 2001.

When it was pointed out that the figure had jumped by almost 20 times since 2005, he said: "I cannot explain. The only explanation I can give you is because of the rollout. Coverage is more extensive. But I think this needs to be improved."

He said the National Registration Department (NRD) was continuously looking at ways to upgrade the MyKad, from security features to even the plastic compound used to make it.

Syed Hamid was speaking to reporters Wednesday after launching the MyDaftar programme at the International Youth Centre in Cheras here.

Under the programme, NRD staff would go on scheduled roadshows to districts and rural areas to help register births, deaths and MyKad information.